BACK IN MAY, still high on President Barack Hussein Obama, mmm-mmm-mmm, the Chronicle said:
Congress has made up its mind that there will be a price on carbon dioxide, most likely via a cap-and-trade system.
So what happened?
It's December 31.
The year of our Lord 2009 is ticking and tocking away, like the president's job-approval number.
Still no cap.
Even less trade.
The Chronicle mistook its wishful thoughts -- high energy prices, a weaken economy -- for reality.
In 2009, it turns out, Congress made up its mind not to make up its mind, which is a good example of Congress's doing precisely what Congress was designed to do.
[It] is a misfortune incident to republican government, though to a less degree than to other governments, that those who administer it may forget their obligations to their constituents, and prove unfaithful to their important trust. In this point of view, a senate, as a second branch of the legislative assembly, distinct from, and dividing the power with, a first, must be in all cases a salutary check on the government. It doubles the security to the people, by requiring the concurrence of two distinct bodies in schemes of usurpation or perfidy, where the ambition or corruption of one would otherwise be sufficient.
(Federalist Papers, No. 62)
Here's a hypothetical wager that 2010 will also end without cap and trade. Why? Because 2010 is an election year, and the American people are set to deal harshly with lawmakers who think like the Houston Chronicle.
* * *
Robert J. Samuelson in February 2007 (emphasis added):
The dirty secret about global warming is this: We have no solution. About 80 percent of the world's energy comes from fossil fuels (coal, oil, natural gas), the main sources of man-made greenhouse gases. Energy use sustains economic growth, which -- in all modern societies -- buttresses political and social stability. Until we can replace fossil fuels or find practical ways to capture their emissions, governments will not sanction the deep energy cuts that would truly affect global warming.
Congress's dilly-dalliance with cap-and-trade legislation is further evidence of the last point.
Considering this reality, you should treat the pious exhortations to "do something" with skepticism, disbelief or contempt. These pronouncements are (take your pick) naive, self-interested, misinformed, stupid or dishonest. Politicians mainly want to be seen as reducing global warming. Companies want to polish their images and exploit markets created by new environmental regulations. As for editorialists and pundits, there's no explanation except superficiality or herd behavior.
UPDATE: Thanks for the link from Harris County Almanac.
Comments